TikToker Cookie King Talks Luke Belmar, '99% Accuracy' Trend And Other Brainrot Memes That He Somehow Started
What's With Jokes That Go 'No, It's Fine, I Just Didn't Think It Would Be Chinese'? Memes Inspired By A TikTok About 'Chinese Heaven' Explained
See The Winner Of February 2025's Meme Of The Month!
What Is The 'John Cena Heel Turn'? The Reasons Behind Cena's Villain Arc And Possible WWE Farewell Tour Explained
Bingus The Sphynx Cat Became A Viral Meme Five Years Ago

996 Pristine Condition Member Originally Posted by jschreier: D Yesterday, 11:32 PM) I'm just baffled at how many people dont see why people like me consider it problematic. As someone who has made his living entirely in the arts for almost fifteen years, (If I don't make my work, I quite literally don't eat.) I'm baffled by people like you who have such unevolved and disrespectful attitudes towards art and artists I work in photography. I thank God that in my industry critics and journalists covering my medium don't act like you and your lot. If we did, perhaps the chilling effect would have meant no one would see important work by the likes of Arbus ("Oh, she exploits poor people and freaks!"), Saudek (oh, look at how he sexualizes women!!!",) and Helnwein COMG!!! Nazi imagery!!!"). If people like you lot were placed in a position to have a significant voice in photography, Robert Mapplethorpe would have been stuck taking "those pretty pictures of flowers, and Steven Meisel would have been told by his rep to stick to taking "pretty" pictures of models, without any of that troubling "social commentary stuff No, in my medium, critics and journalists by and large would stand up for the artist, and want the art to speak for itself, and want to promote art to the widest audience possible, even if it is work that may be controversial or even downright disturbing. See, art that is not stifled is healthy art. Let the art speak for itself, and let the people (and the market) ultimately decide. Criticism is done, but it is done with a conscience for how such criticism should never stifle free expression. As video games become more sophisticated in terms of visuals, perhaps you aren't cut out for being in this position as a commentator on a medium inching ever closer to fine art. Perhaps you should move into writing about politics, if you thing a large-breasted figure is so dangerous that it needs to be labeled "a harmful work of art. I think the art and artists who want to do interesting, personal work and not just cookie-cutter, committee-approved s--- would thank you for exiting the field you are so clearly not committed to the future of. For this medium to grow artistically, it will require dvocates of artists, not judgemental folks offended so easily, and so eager to throw labels on artists. Last edited by Pristine Condition; Yesterday at 11:40 PM Pristine Condition Member Today, 01:15 AM) Quote #1182 Originally Posted by jschreier: Jesus. What a nasty post. Go back to your twitter fans stroking your ego if you think that was a nasty post. If my post was "nasty" then what is calling an artist a 14-year-old boy, accusing him of homophobia, and saying he produces "harmful work[s] of art?" Methinks you simply like to dish out the criticism, and can't bear a little aimed at you in return. ginally Posted by j And this idea that I want to "stifle free expression" is just blowing my mind. I really want to know why so many people think that it's impossible for me to criticize a piece of art - or call it harmful to video game culture - without wanting to censor it. Let me make this clear: I do not want to censor anything. Calling something "harmful" does not equate to saying "This should not be allowed to exist. I would love it if Dragon's Crown didn't have such tasteless designs. That doesn't mean I'm going to tell George Kamitani how to make the game he wants to make. Gee. Where would we have gotten that idea? Oh yeah. The title of your original piece and pretty much all your subsequent writing on this subject, including your attempted character assassination of the artist whose work you think is so harmful. Or perhaps the content of the article, when you suggested the artist should not be hired by the studio. Originally Posted by jschreier This week, someone made a video game to make fun of the Boston bombing. I think most of us would agree that something like that is in poor taste. I'd even say it's harmful to video game culture. That doesn't mean I'd want it censored, or banned, or removed from the Internet. Good for you. But we're talking about stuff that you wrote. I understand that you want to deflect our attention away from that now, but I'm not going to take the bait. Originally Posted by jschreien As for the direct comparisons between photography and gaming, well, if your industry had the same sort of issues with sexism and exclusion that the video game industry does, then that might be more apt. But as I've said before and I'll say again, this is part of a bigger problem. The shocking amount of actual ignorance on display with this statement is simply mind-boggling. It's embarrassing, really You're talking about a medium in photography that was a rich old boys club for at least the first fifty years of it's conception. The medium wouldn't even be available to the middle class for decades. And for example, in photojournalism, a female, Margaret Bourke-White, wouldn't break into the field until after around 30 years of male domination. You're talking about a medium that was also the most popular form o p---------- for about 150 years, with all the free speech, sexual, homosexual and race politics that goes along with that. Exclusion? You're talking about a medium where photographers have been threatened with death for their art, and many have indeed been killed. You're talking about a medium which has produced artists like Mapplethorpe and Serrano for goodness sake. And the industry still has problems with stereotypes. Men are usually thought of as more generally technically proficient photographers, while women are thought to be more sensitive to capturing emotion. It's b------- on both ends. but it exists.

Share Pin Download More

Origin Entry: GamerGate

File type: png

Resolution: (1024px x 803px)

File size: 849 KB

_"*I guess i had to do it if only because people are expecting me to do it. I didn’t even remember this was a thing till yesterday XD*"_

Had to add this because I thought that ppl would actually click the source link and look at the description after all this time

Like...is there any solution to this? Should we start something?

Jalen Hutchinson Studied Culinary Science at Culinary Institute of America (Graduated 2014). Author has 304 answers and 740.1K answer views. 5y Not that I care that much either way, but it did expose a lot of corrupt game developers and game journalists. X Journalists would make claims of people like Anita Sarkeesian "playing video games all her life" when she openly admitted many times she is not a gamer and only starter recently (when it wasn't for an interview). Various developers trading sex or money for good reviews got exposed, journalists who accepted got exposed. People became a bit more critical about supporting a game just because the developer has a victim complex stating tat their game could have only failed because of sexism, instead of their own poor developing skills. What really sealed the deal was opposition often faking their own harassment. Anita sarkeesian and Zoe Quinn have been caught multiple times screenshotting "harassment" while showing that the harrasser's account name in the login. Or when someone called the police to help Sarkeesian against a "very real threat" she was posting about, only for police to find the harasser's messages were coming from her IP address. I just want honesty from the community, and the lies were mostly exposed by the "dreaded" gamergate. 1.3K views • View upvotes 26

View All 4,079 Images

Load 10 Comments

More:

+33

GamerGate - A photographer gives his feedback on the current attitudes on display...

PROTIP: Press the ← and → keys to navigate the gallery, 'g' to view the gallery, or 'r' to view a random image.

996 Pristine Condition Member Originally Posted by jschreier: D Yesterday, 11:32 PM) I'm just baffled at how many people dont see why people like me consider it problematic. As someone who has made his living entirely in the arts for almost fifteen years, (If I don't make my work, I quite literally don't eat.) I'm baffled by people like you who have such unevolved and disrespectful attitudes towards art and artists I work in photography. I thank God that in my industry critics and journalists covering my medium don't act like you and your lot. If we did, perhaps the chilling effect would have meant no one would see important work by the likes of Arbus ("Oh, she exploits poor people and freaks!"), Saudek (oh, look at how he sexualizes women!!!",) and Helnwein COMG!!! Nazi imagery!!!"). If people like you lot were placed in a position to have a significant voice in photography, Robert Mapplethorpe would have been stuck taking "those pretty pictures of flowers, and Steven Meisel would have been told by his rep to stick to taking "pretty" pictures of models, without any of that troubling "social commentary stuff No, in my medium, critics and journalists by and large would stand up for the artist, and want the art to speak for itself, and want to promote art to the widest audience possible, even if it is work that may be controversial or even downright disturbing. See, art that is not stifled is healthy art. Let the art speak for itself, and let the people (and the market) ultimately decide. Criticism is done, but it is done with a conscience for how such criticism should never stifle free expression. As video games become more sophisticated in terms of visuals, perhaps you aren't cut out for being in this position as a commentator on a medium inching ever closer to fine art. Perhaps you should move into writing about politics, if you thing a large-breasted figure is so dangerous that it needs to be labeled "a harmful work of art. I think the art and artists who want to do interesting, personal work and not just cookie-cutter, committee-approved s--- would thank you for exiting the field you are so clearly not committed to the future of. For this medium to grow artistically, it will require dvocates of artists, not judgemental folks offended so easily, and so eager to throw labels on artists. Last edited by Pristine Condition; Yesterday at 11:40 PM Pristine Condition Member Today, 01:15 AM) Quote #1182 Originally Posted by jschreier: Jesus. What a nasty post. Go back to your twitter fans stroking your ego if you think that was a nasty post. If my post was "nasty" then what is calling an artist a 14-year-old boy, accusing him of homophobia, and saying he produces "harmful work[s] of art?" Methinks you simply like to dish out the criticism, and can't bear a little aimed at you in return. ginally Posted by j And this idea that I want to "stifle free expression" is just blowing my mind. I really want to know why so many people think that it's impossible for me to criticize a piece of art - or call it harmful to video game culture - without wanting to censor it. Let me make this clear: I do not want to censor anything. Calling something "harmful" does not equate to saying "This should not be allowed to exist. I would love it if Dragon's Crown didn't have such tasteless designs. That doesn't mean I'm going to tell George Kamitani how to make the game he wants to make. Gee. Where would we have gotten that idea? Oh yeah. The title of your original piece and pretty much all your subsequent writing on this subject, including your attempted character assassination of the artist whose work you think is so harmful. Or perhaps the content of the article, when you suggested the artist should not be hired by the studio. Originally Posted by jschreier This week, someone made a video game to make fun of the Boston bombing. I think most of us would agree that something like that is in poor taste. I'd even say it's harmful to video game culture. That doesn't mean I'd want it censored, or banned, or removed from the Internet. Good for you. But we're talking about stuff that you wrote. I understand that you want to deflect our attention away from that now, but I'm not going to take the bait. Originally Posted by jschreien As for the direct comparisons between photography and gaming, well, if your industry had the same sort of issues with sexism and exclusion that the video game industry does, then that might be more apt. But as I've said before and I'll say again, this is part of a bigger problem. The shocking amount of actual ignorance on display with this statement is simply mind-boggling. It's embarrassing, really You're talking about a medium in photography that was a rich old boys club for at least the first fifty years of it's conception. The medium wouldn't even be available to the middle class for decades. And for example, in photojournalism, a female, Margaret Bourke-White, wouldn't break into the field until after around 30 years of male domination. You're talking about a medium that was also the most popular form o p---------- for about 150 years, with all the free speech, sexual, homosexual and race politics that goes along with that. Exclusion? You're talking about a medium where photographers have been threatened with death for their art, and many have indeed been killed. You're talking about a medium which has produced artists like Mapplethorpe and Serrano for goodness sake. And the industry still has problems with stereotypes. Men are usually thought of as more generally technically proficient photographers, while women are thought to be more sensitive to capturing emotion. It's b------- on both ends. but it exists.

View Gallery Random Image

Top Comments

AsexualInnuendo

AsexualInnuendo

Sep 08, 2014 at 12:22PM EDT

I bet he was later banned from NeoGAF for questioning a Kotaku writer.

+16

Yung Fu

Yung Fu

Sep 08, 2014 at 12:57PM EDT

+9

+ Add a Comment

Comments (10)

Display Comments